Mike McCarthy Retires His Sharpie: Clements Promoted to Playcaller

[Patler]

All of these decisions seem to me to be squarely the responsibility of the head coach. If the GM or President is involved in hiring the staff under the head coach, or deciding who should call plays, or who should coach what, he is meddling, in my opinion.

[woodbuck27]

Yeah, he helped build the Seahawks team that made it to the playoffs twice and the Super Bowl once. Then he came to the Packers who have won the Super Bowl once and gotten to the NFC Championship game 3 times in 10 years.

Your classic response. In my view that's an argument that the corner store Packer teen fan would lean on.

I'm not here to argue or debate this (these) very important for the Packers future move (moves).

You don't seem to understand what I'm getting at? Maybe this might help:

What is a little bit but ................................. a little bit. I'm not happy with 1 NFCC win in three trys.

I believe that by far a majority of Packer nation would agree with my position.

When you discover something contrary to that bring it to the table.

[Patler]

Your classic response. In my view that's an argument that the corner store Packer teen fan would lean on.

I'm not here to argue or debate this (these) very important for the Packers future move (moves).

You don't seem to understand what I'm getting at? Maybe this might help:

What is a little bit but ................................. a little bit. I'm not happy with 1 NFCC win in three trys.

I believe that by far a majority of Packer nation would agree with my position.

When you discover something contrary to that bring it to the table.

If you need to attribute blame, doesn't the Seattle collapse feel more like a failure by the coaching staff than the front office?
Aren't the changes made so far directed toward remedying those failures?

Do you really think a GM should hire the assistants for the HC?
Do you really think the GM should decide the responsibilities of the assistants?
Do you really think the GM should decide who will call the plays?

I can answer unequivocally "No" to each of those questions.

[woodbuck27]

All of these decisions seem to me to be squarely the responsibility of the head coach. If the GM or President is involved in hiring the staff under the head coach, or deciding who should call plays, or who should coach what, he is meddling, in my opinion.

When is meddling an excuse for competent assessment and proper reaction?

Looking at 'the Big Picture' and winning the next Super Bowl as being really what it's all about. As a Packer fan I don't expect less. I can't assume that Aaron Rodgers (any Packer Roster player) could desire less.

I believe that the Team owners or in this case Mark Murphy and GM Ted Thompson and HC Mike McCarthy must be on the same page in terms of the Operation Goal of Success = Super Bowl.

[woodbuck27]

If you need to attribute blame, doesn't the Seattle collapse feel more like a failure by the coaching staff than the front office?
Aren't the changes made so far directed toward remedying those failures?

Do you really think a GM should hire the assistants for the HC?
Do you really think the GM should decide the responsibilities of the assistants?
Do you really think the GM should decide who will call the plays?

I can answer unequivocally "No" to each of those questions.

Then if my response was in opposition it wouldn't matter.

This thread isn't at all directed to upper management error or towards Packer GM Ted Thompson and Mark Murphy. To go there is a smoke screen.

Isn't this thread about how Mike McCarthy got to dropping the play calling duties and serving his responsibility to gather and account for a competent.coaching staff?

[Bossman641]

I can't wait til next year. We will never have to worry about the play-calling to finish out a game again

I'm a little apprehensive on this move. Hopefully any loss in offensive performance will be offset by gains in ST and defense.

[pbmax]

I can't wait til next year. We will never have to worry about the play-calling to finish out a game again

I'm a little apprehensive on this move. Hopefully any loss in offensive performance will be offset by gains in ST and defense.

Be careful what you wish for, re: conservative play calling.

http://www.realfootball365.com/articles/bills/2052

In general, the complaint was he was too conservative. Of course, he really didn't have a good QB.

[Patler]

Then if my response was in opposition it wouldn't matter.

This thread isn't at all directed to upper management error or towards Packer GM Ted Thompson and Mark Murphy. To go there is a smoke screen.

Isn't this thread about how Mike McCarthy got to dropping the play calling duties and serving his responsibility to gather and account for a competent.coaching staff?

We can always debate a difference of opinion, no matter how strong we are in our beliefs.

I think these changes were MM's to decide on and make, and his alone.

[Maxie the Taxi]

So Clements did "a poor job of handling the offense when he was in charge" in Buffalo? Is Stubby just ignorant of this "fact?" Maybe this is an elaborate ruse on Stubby's part to deflect criticism. He gives playcalling over to Clements; Clements screws up; then, Stubby takes playcalling back and the experiment ends forever.

Clements will do fine. If he doesn't, Bennett or someone else will. Rodgers does most of it anyway.Just so Stubby doesn't go back to doing it.

I had two major complaints about Stubby's playcalling: first, it hurt his game management abilities because his head was constantly in his playcard; and second, it hurt his game management abilities because his head was constantly in his playcard.

[Striker]

The Bills offensive personnel under Mularkey/Clements -

QB - Holcomb/Losman
RB - McGahee
WR - Lee Evans/Eric Moulds/Josh Reed/Roscoe Parrish

[ThunderDan]

Your classic response. In my view that's an argument that the corner store Packer teen fan would lean on.

I'm not here to argue or debate this (these) very important for the Packers future move (moves).

You don't seem to understand what I'm getting at? Maybe this might help:

What is a little bit but ................................. a little bit. I'm not happy with 1 NFCC win in three trys.

I believe that by far a majority of Packer nation would agree with my position.

When you discover something contrary to that bring it to the table.

If pointing out TT accomplishment as a GM and his overall positive contributions to two franchises is my "classic response" I will take that as a compliment. Thank you.

And then you go to the old, "It is so obvious that I can see what is wrong with the Packers if I was GM Green Bay would have won 5 Super Bowls in the last 10 years" response.

Let me explain something to you Woody. Neither you nor me nor anyone here has any real idea what happens inside 1265. But to even suggest that Murphy, TT and MM don't realize that there is room for improvement and try to improve the franchise daily is senile.

[mraynrand]

I think these changes were MM's to decide on and make, and his alone.

I agree. And I also believe that Stubby talks to TT all the time for advice and input and that they probably agree on most if not all of the moves.

I believe it is all sunshine, rainbows and little furry ponies at 1265.

[Joemailman]

I believe it is all sunshine, rainbows and little furry ponies at 1265.

Nice call.

[woodbuck27]

I agree. And I also believe that Stubby talks to TT all the time for advice and input and that they probably agree on most if not all of the moves.

I believe it is all sunshine, rainbows and little furry ponies at 1265.

Of course they communicate all the time.That includes PR moves as well.

TT and MM are tied at the hip and thus you have MM's 9 year tenure as HC of the Green Bay Packers and counting.

[woodbuck27]

Edit ....

Let me explain something to you Woody. Neither you nor me nor anyone here has any real idea what happens inside 1265. But to even suggest that Murphy, TT and MM don't realize that there is room for improvement and try to improve the franchise daily is senile.

"But to even suggest that Murphy, TT and MM don't realize that there is room for improvement and try to improve the franchise daily is senile."

senile adjective:

1. (of a person) having or showing the weaknesses or diseases of old age, especially a loss of mental faculties.

I disagree with your repugnant statement as valid in terms of any membership here at Packerrats. To introduce such judgement on any mans/womans views regarding the inner works and operation of a Pro Sports franchise sparks of the reaction of an obsessed fan.